“Section 2(24)(x)”

Pivotree Solutions India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Bridge Sgi Solutions India Private Limited), Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

long periods. That Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by way of deduction authorized by the statute ... crucial. The former forms part of the employers’ income, and the later retains its character as an income (albeit deemed), by virtue of Section 2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee

Pivotree Solutions India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Bridge Sgi Solutions India Private Limited), Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

long periods. That Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by way of deduction authorized by the statute ... crucial. The former forms part of the employers’ income, and the later retains its character as an income (albeit deemed), by virtue of Section 2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee

Ramakrishnappa Nagaraj, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19

long periods. That Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by way of deduction authorized by the statute ... crucial. The former forms part of the employers’ income, and the later retains its character as an income (albeit deemed), by virtue of Section 2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee

Bangalore Dor Tech Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19

long periods. That Parliament intended to retain the separate character of these two amounts, is evident from the use of different language. Section 2(24)(x) too, deems amount received from the employees (whether the amount is received from the employee or by way of deduction authorized by the statute ... part of the employers’ income, and the later retains its character as an income (albeit deemed), by virtue of Page 4 of 5 Section 2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee

Sri Rajanikanth Reddy, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

under the provisions of the PF Act and the PF Scheme, that would have to be treated as income within the meaning of Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act and in which case, the assessee is liable to pay tax on the said amount treating that

Muthyala Suryababu, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

under the provisions of the PF Act and the PF Scheme, that would have to be treated as income within the meaning of Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act and in which case, the assessee is liable to pay tax on the said amount treating that ... received by the employer (which is actually a recovery out of salary disbursement) shall be treated as income in view of section 2(24)(x). However, it is eligible for deduction only when it is remitted on or before the "due date". Explanation 1 to section 36(1)(va) says

Muthyala Suryababu, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

under the provisions of the PF Act and the PF Scheme, that would have to be treated as income within the meaning of Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act and in which case, the assessee is liable to pay tax on the said amount treating that ... received by the employer (which is actually a recovery out of salary disbursement) shall be treated as income in view of section 2(24)(x). However, it is eligible for deduction only when it is remitted on or before the "due date". Explanation 1 to section 36(1)(va) says

M/S. Optimal Strategix Consulting Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

under the provisions of the PF Act and the PF Scheme, that would have to be treated as income within the meaning of Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act and in which case, the assessee is liable to pay tax on the said amount treating that

Bharat Silks, Bangalore vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

under the provisions of the PF Act and the PF Scheme, that would have to be treated as income within the meaning of Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act and in which case, the assessee is liable to pay tax on the said amount treating that

M/S. Daxer Trading Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2020-21

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU